Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Failing to write to history file if containing directory doesn't exist
- X-seq: zsh-users 11966
- From: "Nikolai Weibull" <now@xxxxxxxx>
- To: "Matthew Wozniski" <godlygeek@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Failing to write to history file if containing directory doesn't exist
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:30:08 +0200
- Cc: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=H2sHqRVyL1/YOmccEU7+0tGep3iWvZjkTVP5w36nYLs=; b=tWNZR+pf5YzvwpNxEIqqHCxaavX3jsz9/aaYlFokJUnx6hQcgtEmfYNRv5ihHP7ceR6d4/oc0Fo3Cmiq8Sbq2c4iHAbKscH2OnRRHt9sTaM1Qcc6Lbba81g2lmwtpsWLSUB24C1lQjIxCkdEfkzCo/sKN0nKaak2zkBP/cO4Em4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=spzJthI9wYkdLrdtnTlKUsWVI4Q00d646gmhkNe3FV3E3vAkyTRR3BhAh8W8mHsTl/E9I9+vBu084575pSZkLVeqhQfyEEQbwNI3pjX2oCuHL3Rh8cFyS14Z8CTSDtm2iFESdrJikfnqSHKVe73hivbG0Wai+t1/cNMNd4tugLM=
- In-reply-to: <20071008151949.GA18576@mastermind>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <dbfc82860710080309m41cfa984q5aa0474c6b4bdf62@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200710081015.l98AFlIU018448@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <dbfc82860710080508o3ef1de0br957caf39bb2aa19f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200710081338.l98Dc2br012284@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <dbfc82860710080705w6e90db9i2a9714caf27460c4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071008141403.GA25326@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20071008151949.GA18576@mastermind>
- Sender: nikolai.weibull@xxxxxxxxx
On 10/8/07, Matthew Wozniski <godlygeek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:14:03AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > Personally, I'd be a little shocked and annoyed if zsh started creating
> > directories without my explicit permission.
> I don't know that I'd be shocked, but I would err on the side of
> a smaller, faster, more maintainable shell, given how easy to handle
> in shell code the problem is. Shell code is more easily maintained
> than C, and for an error condition that should only exist when the
> HISTFILE parameter is set, I think adding code to the shell itself
> would be overkill. If you're already setting HISTFILE yourself, it's
> not too much extra work to add an mkdir -p above it.
And what if the directory gets deleted between the time HISTFILE is
set and the shell exits?
I'd rather err on the side of a more intelligent, "work hard for the
user"-type shell that doesn't let my data disappear out into oblivion
without doing its best to keep said data around.
Messages sorted by: